Behavioral consequences of second-person pronouns in written communications between authors and reviewers of scientific papers.
other · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 38167747.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1038/s41467-023-44515-1 and PMC identifier 10762116.
- Licence recorded as CC BY.
- The licence permits redistribution, so the abstract is shown in full and the full text is available from the publisher.
Abstract
Pronoun usage's psychological underpinning and behavioral consequence have fascinated researchers, with much research attention paid to second-person pronouns like "you," "your," and "yours." While these pronouns' effects are understood in many contexts, their role in bilateral, dynamic conversations (especially those outside of close relationships) remains less explored. This research attempts to bridge this gap by examining 25,679 instances of peer review correspondence with Nature Communications using the difference-in-differences method. Here we show that authors addressing reviewers using second-person pronouns receive fewer questions, shorter responses, and more positive feedback. Further analyses suggest that this shift in the review process occurs because "you" (vs. non-"you") usage creates a more personal and engaging conversation. Employing the peer review process of scientific papers as a backdrop, this research reveals the behavioral and psychological effects that second-person pronouns have in interactive written communications.
Medical subject headings
- Language
- Communication